1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates:    (a) generally to figure toy amusement devices with selectively displayed alternative faces;    (b) particularly to figure toy amusement devices having selectively displayed alternative faces and enclosed reinforcing or skeletal portions; and    (c) most specifically to figure toy amusement devices having selectively displayed alternative faces and enclosed reinforcing or skeletal portions including pivoted joints.
2. General Background
Various approaches to achieving anatomical verisimilitude in full size human figure Dolls or mannequins are known as reflected by the categorization recited above in the ‘field of the invention’ taken directly from the Classification Manual of the U.S. Patent Office. And, as further reflected by said categorization, these approaches are typically mutually exclusive. This is considered to reflect, most fundamentally, the practicalities of the matter in that full size human figures are made for different purposes and the approach or aspect desired for a particular purpose is typically focused upon to the exclusion of other aspects simply because it would be too expensive to provide more than the aspect required.
Broadly speaking it is considered that appearance is generally one matter and variable posture another. The truth to this is perhaps best or most easily set forth with reference to the earliest and most famous, i.e. seminal, myth regarding the attempt to create a full size human figure having a fully human verisimilitude, Pygmalion, “A king of Cyprus who carved and then fell in love with a statue of a woman, which Aphrodite brought to life as Galatea” (American Heritage Dictionary, 2nd Edition, Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, 1985).
Pygmalion is, of course, a myth and that is part of the point to be appreciated: it is not possible to create a person but the desire to do so is very strong, particularly on the part of males, in the creation of female forms, with the physical techniques they have mastered. Although both a woman and a man are necessary to create another human it is women, obviously, who endure pregnancy and actually give birth after nourishing the fetus for nine months. Every person alive is hence the flesh and bone of their mother, necessarily a woman, and all a man can do to create a person is to persuade a woman to accept his seed; or rape one. This may seem a crude if not crazy digression but is considered wholly germane to the present invention for reasons explained presently.
One of the purposes of creating an anatomical verisimilitude of a human being, particularly a woman, and for making that ‘doll’, for lack of a better word, as ‘life-like’ as possible is for male adult amusement including sexual release. This is appreciated to be a controversial topic and subject matter particularly for patents. It is recognized that many people find the very idea of a ‘sex doll’ repugnant. But it is considered that, prudery aside, sex dolls can actually only provide a very valuable contribution to society as an avenue for the release of frustrated sexual urges that otherwise readily lead to the contemplation of if not the commission of rape and or other violence.
The foundation of this argument lies in the logical application of Darwinian principles applied to the human species and the recognition that the male sex hormone, testosterone, induces a sexual urge that is closely related to, if not wholly responsible for, male aggression. The availability of plausible substitutes to humans in the release of frustrated sexual urges is hence seen to provide an alternative to: (a) rape, (b) the contemplation of rape, (c) aggressive behavior generally, and (d) aggressive behavior toward women particularly. Sex dolls are hence seen to be a valuable ally, and not a competitor, to women particularly in the ‘war between the sexes’ and to promote social harmony generally.
3. Discussion of the Prior Art
Dolls having selectively displayed alternative faces that achieve plausible human verisimilitude are uncommon. The most pertinent reference known in this regard is U.S. Pat. No. 5,971,763 issued to Yau Oct. 26, 1999 for a ‘Method of Teaching, Training and Practice (of) Cosmetology Techniques and a Make-Up Mannequin Kit for Use Therewith’ because this patent discloses the most accurate verisimilitude found in the prior art for ‘selectively displayed alternative’ human faces. This method, however, does not disclose a doll comprised of a complete figure: it discloses only a “make-up mannequin head”:                A cosmetology training, teaching and practice system, and a make-up mannequin kit, each characterized by provision of a soft skin make-up mannequin head having a body carrying an oval symmetrical facial configuration and plural soft skin flexible, elastic, resilient and stretchable companion mask members suitable for mounting upon the make-up mannequin head. Each of the companion mask members having, each of which is formed of size and shape conforming to the size of the make-up mannequin head and having a facial configuration identical (sic) to the facial configuration of said make-up mannequin head. Each companion mask member having a surface of skin tone and color representative of the skin tone and color of different plural human ethnic and racial origin(s). The selected companion mask is stretched to mount upon the make-up mannequin head and is sufficiently resilient to spring back in tight engagement with the facial configuration of the make-up mannequin head. The mannequin kit includes, in addition to the make-up mannequin head and companion masks, all the instructions, application implements and cosmetic compositions required for the teaching, training and practice of the cosmetology art along with a stand for mounting the make-up mannequin head and a carrier for holding and transporting the contents of the kit. (Abstract, recited in full)        
It is noted that ‘identical’ means the same exact same element and that in the above recitation this results in a logical fallacy although the intended meaning is clear.
In a similar vein it is noted, more significantly, that “a body carrying an oval symmetrical facial configuration and plural soft skin flexible, elastic, resilient and stretchable companion mask members suitable for mounting upon the make-up mannequin head” does not refer to the ‘body’ of a doll as opposed to the head, as is hopefully clear from a reading of the full abstract and for which reason the same has been recited in full. In brief, Yau does not disclose a full or complete doll or mannequin but only a head and a plurality of masks therefor, along with ‘make-up’ accessories and carrier for all these system components.
Wigs are considered to be well known and it is also considered equally well known that wigs are an independent aspect to mannequins, many other dolls, and both women and men even if typically known as ‘hair pieces’ in the last case. Wigs are generally considered to comprise three types according to the source of the hair used: (a) genuine, human, hair; (b) animal hair, e.g. from a horse's tail; and (c) synthetic hair. The first is the most desirable and expensive and the last the most affordable. The purpose is generally the same: to provide the verisimilitude of an appealing abundance of ‘natural hair’ for the doll or person wearing the same.
With regard to figure toys having enclosed reinforcing or skeletal portions including a pivoted joint the most pertinent known prior art references are: U.S. Pat. No. 1,595,203 issued Aug. 10, 1926 to Leathers for a ‘Toy and the Manufacture Thereof’; U.S. Pat. No. 2,129,421 issued to Hales Sep. 6, 1938 for a ‘Mannikin and Method of Making Same; U.S. Pat. No. 3,628,282 issued to Johnson et al. on Dec. 21, 1971 for an ‘Articulated Fashion Doll’; and U.S. Pat. No. 4,968,282 issued to Robson et al. on Nov. 6, 1990 for a ‘Poseable Doll’.
Leathers discloses a doll with rubber skin, preferably dip molded, and sponge rubber, preferably vulcanized, interior encasing a rigid skeletal structure having joints. The joints preferably are ‘friction hinges’ made from stamped metal pieces with adjacent disc portions held together by a grommet or coil spring elements.
Hales discloses a “life-like figure of a manikin comprising a jointed skeleton covered with a flexible outer covering of sponge rubber or similar elastic material.” (col. 1, lines 6–9) Ball and socket joints are used “in which the friction . . . may be controlled by adjustment so that the various members of the frame may be adjusted to different positions until moved” (col. 1, lines 11–16) “The skeleton is made of tubular metal frame-work of aluminum or similar light metal” (col. 2, lines 40–42) or other sufficiently strong, light, and rigid material. Coil springs internal to threaded tubular skeletal members are biased against the ball joints and adjustment of the resulting friction adjusted by varying the depth of the threaded engagement. A bilateral hollow shell portion for the chest and the abdominal regions is further disclosed. Hollow spaces about the tubular skeletal members are provided to facilitate freedom of movement within the rubber body.
Johnson et al. disclose an ‘Articulated Fashion Doll’: “with limbs that move in a lifelike manner.” A “double ball-and-socket joint” “permits tuning and tilting of the head”, “combined ball-and-socket and pin” joints are used in the shoulders and a “double-pin joint” (Abstract) is used for the wrists. Plastic is used for the body, the skin is vinyl. The legs have lateral ball and socket joints facilitating outward as well as forward and backward movement. And the feet have rachet joints facilitating positioning with low or high heels.
Robson et al. disclose a ‘poseable doll’ having ball and socket joints for the head, arms, and legs distinguished by trapping the skin in these joints with a snap ring.
In consideration of the prior art it is lastly noted that substantially full size dolls specifically intended for adult male sexual release are known ranging from inflatable ‘love dolls’ to very sophisticated and expensive products having full articulation and excellent verisimilitude of the human female figure. The first known manufacture of this last category is known as the ‘Real Doll’ and was invented, but not patented, by the present inventor. It has since been imitated by other manufacturers.
None of these ‘love dolls’, however, permit selective display of alternative faces. This is considered a very serious defect with regard to proper consideration of any of these as prior art pertinent to the present invention and because the present inventor was the inventor of the first fully articulated ‘love doll’ this product, and direct imitations of it, are properly excluded from the pertinent prior art except in an historical context.
Statement of Need
In summary of the pertinent known prior art it is considered that substantially full articulation of body parts, tubular skeletal structure, hollow chest, and rubber encasement of articulated skeletal structure including pivoted and ball and socket joints that provide for anatomically accurate movement for full, complete, dolls are known to the prior art and that a mannequin type head system providing for the selective display of alternative faces possessing human verisimilitude is also known thereto. However, there are no dolls disclosed possessing a fully articulated skeletal structure encased in an rubber body further providing for the display of selected alternative faces possessing human verisimilitude.
Because the face is of great importance to attaining human verisimilitude and because it is considered desirable to be able to selectively display alternative faces upon a fully articulated doll thereby obtaining variation of appearance in a doll having both visual and postural verisimilitude a need for the same is hence recognized.